EVERGREENS IN THE LANDSCAPE 19 



placed together with fair effect. The lack of conformity in 

 outline seems the greatest problem. However, spruce and fir 

 look alike to the camera, the triangles are all triangular; 

 juniper and arbor- vitae are equally exclamation points; pine, 

 hemlock, and yew at length spread out similar wide arms; and 

 the low dwarfs, as Mugho pine, dwarf juniper, and the Tom 

 Thumbs make vegetable mattresses. There are, then, these 

 four groups, and a massing within each group gives similarities 

 of outline and structure; a choice from any two or more of 

 these groups gives distinct contrasts. 



In small areas one conifer can dominate the scene; or a 

 group of a few can be the central feature of the planting. This 

 means that the evergreen plant material should be chosen and 

 placed first (on paper) and the attendant other vegetation is 

 chosen to set it off by contrast of outline, structure, texture, 

 color, size, and position. An equal mixture of evergreens and 

 deciduous trees and shrubs is rarely satisfying. There is too 

 much equality in bulk and the contrast loses value. For best 

 pictorial effects, it is safest to keep the two types of vegetation 

 quite or nearly apart and separated, except when definite 

 differences of vegetation are desirable, and then the differences 

 are strengthened by inequality of bulk and quantity. 



One evergreen tree is well set off by a background of other 

 similar or contrasting evergreens, but it is too obvious to show 

 off well in good composition or contrast in front of a mass of 

 deciduous trees. A small group of related conifers, a small 

 unit in themselves, look much less lonesome against the larger 

 area of deciduous background. They derive strength from one 

 another and are less structurally unrelated to their contrasted 

 vegetation. 



Evergreens in mass formation make excellent backing to 

 show off the special beauties of some tree — red maple in spring 



